plug-in hybrid electric vehicles apsenergy march 2 nd, 2008 dr. mark duvall electric power research...
TRANSCRIPT
Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles
APSenergyMarch 2nd, 2008
Dr. Mark DuvallElectric Power Research Institute
2© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV)Combustion engine and stored electric energy both usedAdaptation of existing hybrids
Range-Extended Electric Vehicle (REEV)Drive power is primarily electricEngine is used only when stored electrical energy is exhausted
Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV)Use on on-board electricityRecharged from electrical gridNo engine
Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV)Combustion engine plus one or more electric motors. Uses only hydrocarbon fuel
3© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
A Few Thoughts on Current Status(2007 was a big year)
•Most major OEMs have either announced PHEV activities or are already moving– Diversity of activities– Major presence at Detroit Auto Show– Recent DOE solicitation
•Reunification of PHEV concept to include both EV-based and HEV-based concepts
•Growing consensus around advanced battery manufacturing and cost as key issues
•Renewed discussion on the future of U.S. battery manufacturing
4© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Plug-In Hybrid – Many Different Designs
Split Parallel
Series
5© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Vehicle Fuel Economy Analyses
6© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Vehicle Fuel Economy – Torque Control
Battery Depleting
Battery Sustaining
• Component efficiencies from modeling (FUDS)
• Fuel inputs need Gasoline to Electricity Equivalence:– Fuel Costs ($/gal, $/kWh)– Well to Tank Efficiency – CO2 Emissions (g/kWh, g/gal)
7© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Vehicle Fuel Economy – Torque Control
• Results of Optimization– T_engine = f(rpm, T_command)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
Powertrain Speed, rpm
De
sir
ed
Po
we
rtra
in O
utp
ut
To
rqu
e,
Nm
Optimal Engine Torque
-16.18095
-16.18095-16.18095
-1.871905
-1.871905
-1.871905
12.43
714
12.4371412.43714
12
.43
71
4
26.7
4619
26.74
619
26.7461926.74619
26
.74
61
9
41.05
524
41.0
5524
41.05524
41
.05
52
4
55.3
6429
55.36
429
55.36429
55.36429
55
.36
42
9
69.6
7333
69.67
333
69.6733369.6733369.67333
69
.67
33
3
83.9
8238
83.98
238
83.9823883.9823883.98238
83
.98
23
8
98.2
9143
98.29
143
98.2914398.29143
98.29
143
112.
6005
112.6
005
112.6005112.6005
112.6
005
126.
9095
126.9
095
126.9095
126.9095
141.
2186
141
.2186
141.2186
141.2186
155.5276
155.
5276
155.5276
155.5
276
169.8367
169.
8367
169.8367
16
9.8
36
7
184.1457
184.1457
184.1457
184.1
457
198.4548
198.4548
198.4
548
212.7638
212.
763
8
212.7638
227.0
729
227.
0729
227.0729 241.3819
255.6
91
255.6
91
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
Powertrain Speed, rpm
De
sir
ed
Po
we
rtra
in O
utp
ut
To
rqu
e,
Nm
Optimal Engine Torque
-16.
18095
-16.18095
-16.18095
-16
.18
09
5
-1.8
719
05
-1.871905
-1.871905
-1.8
71
90
5
12.43
714
12.43714
12.43
714
26.74
619
26.74619
41.05
52441.05524
55.36
42955.36429
69.67333
69.67333
69.67333
83
.98
23
8
83.98238
98.2
914
3
98.29143
112.
6005112.6005
126.
9095126.9095
141.
2186
141.
2186141.2186
155.
5276
155.5276155.5276 169.8367
169.8367 184.1457
198.4548
212.7638212.7638227.0729
241.3819255.691
Battery Depleting – Fueling Cost OptimizedBattery Sustaining
8© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Engine On/Off Algorithm Comparison
Comparison of Engine Control Algorithms with Optimal Torque Control
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44
Fuel Economy, mpgd
Nu
mb
er
of
En
gin
e S
tart
s o
n t
he
FU
DS
C
yc
le (
Ho
t)
Improving Engine Control
Rules Based Engine Control Algorithms
Optimal Engine Control Algorithms
9© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Battery State-of-Charge in a PHEV
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6Time (hr)
SO
C (
%)
Charge Depletion Mode
Charge Sustained
Rest Regular Charge Mode
Rest
10© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
LiIon Testing at SCE (capacity)
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Total Cycle #
Cap
acit
y (
Ah
)
C/1 Capacity Test C/3 Capacity Test EOL @ C/1 EOL @ C/3
First four data points not considered in the extrapolation
LiIon capacity is looking good. There is some degradation, but it is within bounds and linear.
11© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
LiIon Testing at SCE (power)
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Total Cycle #
Peak P
ow
er
- P
ack L
evel (k
W)
60% DOD 70% DOD 80% DOD EOL @ 60% DOD EOL @ 70% DOD EOL @ 80% DOD
First four data points not considered in the extrapolation
LiIon power is also degrading, but within acceptable limits.
12© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Future of the Electric Sector Three Possible Scenarios
Scenario Definition
High CO2 Medium CO2 Low CO2
Cost of CO2 Emissions Allowances
Low Moderate High
Power Plant Retirements Slower Normal Faster
New Generation Technologies
Unavailable:Coal with CCSNew NuclearNew Biomass
Normal Technology
Availability and Performance
Available:Retrofit of CCS to
existing IGCC and PC plants
Lower Performance:
SCPC, CCNG, GT, Wind, and Solar
Higher Performance:Solar
Annual Electricity Demand Growth
1.56% per year on average
1.56% per year on average
2010 - 2025: 0.45% 2025 - 2050: None
SCPC – Supercritical Pulverized Coal CCNG – Combined Cycle Natural GasGT – Gas Turbine (natural gas) CCS – Carbon Capture and Storage
Key Parameters• Value of CO2
emissions allowances
• Plant capacity retirement and expansion
• Technology availability, cost and performance
• Electricity demand• PHEV bounding
scenarios of 20%, 62%, and 80% new vehicle market share by 2050
13© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Power Plant-Specific PHEV Emissions in 2010PHEV 20 – 12,000 Annual Miles
Coal Natural Gas Non-EmittingGeneration
14© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Increase with Liquid Fossil-Fuel Alternatives to Oil
Source: Farrell, A. E. and Brandt, Adam R. (2006). Risks of the oil transition. Environmental Research Letters, 2006.
15© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Electric Sector Simulation Results (2050)PHEV 10, 20, & 40 – 12,000 Annual Miles
16© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Gre
enho
use
Gas
Em
issi
ons
Redu
ction
s (m
illio
n m
etri
c to
ns)
Low PHEV Share Medium PHEV Share High PHEV Share
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Electricity grid evolves over time
• Nationwide fleet takes time to renew itself or “turn over”
• Impact would be low in early years, but could be very high in future
• A potential 400-500 million metric ton annual reduction in GHG emissions Annual Reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions
From PHEV Adoption
17© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Overall CO2e Results
• All nine scenarios resulted in CO2e reductions from PHEV adoption• Every region of the country will see reductions• In the future, PHEVs charged from new coal (highest emitter)
w/o CCS roughly equivalent to HEV, superior to CV– There is unlikely to be a future electric scenario where PHEVs
do not return CO2e benefit
2050 Annual CO2e Reduction
(million metric tons)
Electric Sector CO2 Intensity
High Medium Low
PHEV Fleet Penetration
Low 163 177 193
Medium 394 468 478
High 474 517 612
18© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Impacts to EnergyElectricity and Petroleum
• Moderate electricitydemand growth
• Capacity expansion 19 to 72 GW by 2050 nationwide (1.2 – 4.6%)
• 3-4 million barrels per day inoil savings (Medium PHEV Case, 2050) 0.0
1.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.09.0
10.0
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050An
nual
Elec
tric
Sect
or En
ergy
(m
illio
n GW
h)
Low PHEV Med PHEV High PHEV No PHEVs
Electricity Demand: Medium CO2 Case
19© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
U.S. Power Plant Emissions Trends
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
• Power plant emissions of SO2 and NOx will continue to decrease due to tighter federal regulatory limits (caps) on emissions
• Other local and national regulations further constrain power plantemissions
• Air quality is determined by emissions from all sources undergoing chemical reactions within the atmosphere
20© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Net Changes in Criteria Emissions Due to PHEVs
Power Plant Emissions• Emissions capped under law
(SO2, NOx, Hg) are essentially unchanged
• Primary PM emissions increase (defined by a performance standard)
Vehicle Emissions• NOx, VOC, SO2, PM all
decrease• Significant NOx, VOC
reductions at vehicle tailpipe• Reduction in refinery and
related emissions
21© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PHEVs Improve Overall Air QualityReduced Formation of Ozone
• Air quality model simulates atmospheric chemistry and transport
• Lower NOx and VOC emissions results in less ozone formation particularly in urban areas
Change in 8-Hour Ozone Design Value (ppb)PHEV Case – Base Case
22© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PHEVs Improve Overall Air Quality Reduced Formation of Secondary PM2.5
• PM2.5 includes both direct emissions and secondary PM formed in the atmosphere
• PHEVs reduce motor vehicle emissions of VOC and NOx.
• VOCs emissions from power plants are not significant
• Total annual SO2 and NOx from power plants capped by federal law
• The net result of PHEVs is a notable decrease in the formation of secondary PM2.5
Change in Daily PM2.5 Design Value (µg m-3)PHEV Case – Base Case
23© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PHEVs Improve Overall Air Quality Reduced Deposition of Sulfates, Nitrates, Nitrogen, Mercury
24© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Future of the Electric Sector Three Possible Scenarios
Scenario Definition
High CO2 Medium CO2 Low CO2
Cost of CO2 Emissions Allowances
Low Moderate High
Power Plant Retirements Slower Normal Faster
New Generation Technologies
Unavailable:Coal with CCSNew NuclearNew Biomass
Normal Technology
Availability and Performance
Available:Retrofit of CCS to
existing IGCC and PC plants
Lower Performance:
SCPC, CCNG, GT, Wind, and Solar
Higher Performance:Solar
Annual Electricity Demand Growth
1.56% per year on average
1.56% per year on average
2010 - 2025: 0.45% 2025 - 2050: None
SCPC – Supercritical Pulverized Coal CCNG – Combined Cycle Natural GasGT – Gas Turbine (natural gas) CCS – Carbon Capture and Storage
Key Parameters• Value of CO2
emissions allowances
• Plant capacity retirement and expansion
• Technology availability, cost and performance
• Electricity demand
Electricity as a Fuel (for Transportation)
APSenergyMarch 2nd, 2008
Dr. Mark DuvallElectric Power Research Institute
26© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Overview – Electric Utility Perspective
• Long-held consensus view of the value of electrifying transportation– Financial– Environmental– Energy Security
• Industry is incredibly diverse– Number of companies and organizations– Financial and operating models– External requirements
• Electric sector undergoing fundamental change– Environmental and sustainability– New technology adoption
27© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Plug-In Hybrid Value Proposition for the Electric Utility Industry
• Electricity as a transportation fuel• PHEVs as energy storage• Demand response• Energy efficiency• Integration of renewables• Load shaping• Improved asset utilization• Improved system efficiency• Lower cost of stationary energy
storage
• PHEVs synergistic with Smart Grid• Emissions reductions • CO2 reductions or credits• Environmental Image• Customer satisfaction• Local economic development• Improve reliability• Improve customer rate structure
We need to understand the many components
28© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
29© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
What is the Smart Grid?Will PHEVs Participate in the Smart Grid
• Smart Grid is the interaction of power systems and information technology
• Enables greater information flow, superior management of system for reliability, stability, cost, etc.
• Empowers ratepayers to manage energy and costs
• Standardized communication between vehicles and the grid critical to enabling this link. ?
30© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Electric System of the Future Efficient Use of Energy
• Provide information and tools to install infrastructure now• Develop designs and migration strategies for “ideal” future
EfficientBuildingSystems
UtilityCommunications
DynamicSystemsControl
DataManagement
DistributionOperations
DistributedGeneration& Storage
Plug-In Hybrids
SmartEnd-UseDevices
ControlInterface
AdvancedMetering
Consumer Portal& Building EMS
Internet Renewables
PV
31© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Electric Load Duration Curve
Source: California Independent System Operator CorporationSource: California Independent System Operator Corporation
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 6,500 7,000 7,500 8,000 8,500
MW
Hours per YearHours per Year
Last 25% of capacity needed less than 10% of
the time
Last 5% (2,500 MW) needed less than 50 hours
per year
32© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Integrating Renewables
•Source – Pacific Gas & Electric
33© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Energy StorageTransportation – Electric Sector Synergies
•Energy storage is a disruptive technology for the electric industry
•Cost-effective energy storage would benefit all areas of the energy value chain: generation, transmission, distribution, and end-use
•Key applications: firming large penetration of intermittent renewables, grid support, end-use load shifting, etc.
•Current energy storage systems are only marginally cost competitive. Costs need to come down by factor of 2-5 times.
•Need innovation and standardization as well as policy recognition.
34© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PHEV Interface to Infrastructure
•General consensus that first step is charging-only functionality– Intelligent charging is key to minimizing customer and utility
costs, customer satisfaction•Cooperation on standards currently ongoing
– Infrastructure Working Council– Utility participation in SAE committees
•Understanding tradeoffs and capabilities between numerous communications options
•V2G and V2H (home) are out there—not yet clear consensus on value and feasibility
35© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Technologies for New Generation in 2010-2015
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50Cost of CO2, $/metric ton
Levelized Cost of Electricity, $/MWh
Wind@29% CF
Nuclear
PC
IGCC
Biomass
NGCC@$6
36© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Technologies for New Generation in 2020-2025
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50Cost of CO2, $/metric ton
Levelized Cost of Electricity, $/MWh
Nuclear
Wind@40%CF
Biomass
IGCC w/cap
NGCC@$6
PC w/cap
Solar (CSP)
37© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Summary
•Electricity is a clean, abundant, low-carbon, non-petroleum based transportation fuel
•Infrastructure standards are a critical•Numerous elements to the value proposition that must be
clearly understood•Information flow between vehicle and utiliity—on some level—
is critical to maximizing value•Energy storage also a disruptive technology to electric sector
– Lack of installed manufacturing•National demonstrations are important, as soon as feasible